West Covina Homeowner Finds Hidden Camera in His Bushes

Hidden surveillance devices are being found on private properties across Southern California. These cameras are often disguised with fake grass or decorative elements and placed in bushes or yards to monitor the routines of homeowners. In many cases, they’re believed to be used by organized burglary groups to scout homes before break-ins.

The discoveries are not isolated. Incidents have been reported in West Covina, Chino Hills, Alhambra, Santa Barbara, and other suburban areas. In several cases, the cameras were spotted just days before burglaries occurred. The pattern points to a deliberate tactic—criminals placing low-cost, battery-powered cameras in residential neighborhoods to collect information without triggering alarm systems or drawing attention.

The Emerging Threat of Hidden Surveillance Devices in Residential Areas

A growing number of homeowners across Southern California are reporting a disturbing trend: small, hidden surveillance devices planted around their homes without their knowledge. These devices are not part of any legitimate security system—they are unauthorized, deliberately camouflaged tools placed by unknown individuals. Often disguised with fake grass, artificial flowers, or other outdoor elements, the cameras are positioned to blend into landscaping and remain unnoticed. Their primary function appears to be monitoring the movements of residents—specifically, to observe when people are home and when they are away.

In West Covina, a homeowner named George Nguyen found one such camera tucked into the hedges of his front yard. He discovered it late at night while watering plants, noticing a faint green light coming from the bush. Upon closer inspection, he realized it was a compact, well-hidden device facing his home. The camera was covered in fake grass to help it disappear into the surroundings.

According to Nguyen, it was only after kicking the object and feeling its weight that he realized it was some sort of electronic equipment. The camera had been actively recording the front of his home, likely to track his daily schedule. Police confirmed it was indeed a functioning surveillance device, and it was not the only one reported in the area.

This isn’t an isolated case. Similar incidents have surfaced in nearby communities such as Chino Hills, Alhambra, Santa Barbara, and Lost Hills. In each case, the cameras were discovered in locations where they could record homes discreetly—tucked into bushes, shaped like decorative elements, and often facing doors, driveways, or walkways. Law enforcement officials have linked many of these instances to organized burglary groups, including so-called “burglary tourism” rings. These groups, often originating from South America, enter the country with the specific intent of identifying and robbing homes. Using inconspicuous cameras, they monitor the habits of residents to plan break-ins during times when the house is most likely to be empty.

Even when a home is not burglarized, the psychological impact of discovering such a device is significant. Nguyen, like many others, was disturbed by the realization that someone had been covertly watching his home. His neighbors reacted with similar concern, with at least one stating that they immediately checked their own property for similar hidden devices. This sense of being surveilled without consent—especially in a place where one expects privacy—is both unsettling and violating. As these reports become more frequent, it raises serious concerns about the ease with which criminals can now conduct passive reconnaissance using off-the-shelf technology.

How Criminals Are Using Surveillance to Facilitate Targeted Burglaries

The hidden cameras being found in residential neighborhoods are not random pranks or one-off invasions of privacy. Investigators believe they are part of a larger, deliberate strategy used by organized criminal groups to streamline and professionalize home burglaries. Rather than relying on chance, these groups are using inexpensive, discreet surveillance tools to monitor homeowners’ schedules and routines. The cameras allow them to determine precisely when a house is unoccupied, improving their odds of entering and exiting without confrontation or detection.

Many of these operations appear to be linked to what authorities are now referring to as “burglary tourism.” This term describes foreign nationals—often from countries in South America—who travel to the U.S. specifically to commit property crimes. These groups tend to be highly coordinated, targeting affluent suburban areas where houses are more spread out and less likely to have active foot traffic during the day. By planting hidden cameras days or even weeks in advance, they can observe residents’ comings and goings, identify security blind spots, and look for patterns in package deliveries, dog-walking routines, and work schedules.

In one recent case in Chino Hills, a hidden camera was discovered in a gated community, disguised to resemble a flower. It was placed in such a way that it had a clear line of sight to the home’s entrance. This kind of setup is designed to quietly collect data without triggering traditional alarm systems or raising suspicion. The groups behind these operations often employ multiple individuals: one or two to plant and retrieve devices, others to analyze footage, and still others to carry out the break-ins. This level of organization makes it harder to track them, especially when the individuals involved rotate in and out of the country or use false identities.

Law enforcement agencies in California have begun to notice patterns in the timing and placement of these devices. They tend to appear in neighborhoods just before a string of break-ins, suggesting that the surveillance is not only intentional, but integral to the planning process. Once a home is deemed vulnerable—meaning the occupants are gone regularly and security measures are minimal—the group may strike with precision, often in daylight hours when neighbors are at work. In several cases, homes were burglarized within days of a hidden camera being discovered or reported. This underscores the function of these devices not as passive tools, but as active components in a tactical crime strategy.

Practical Steps Homeowners Can Take to Detect and Prevent Hidden Surveillance

While these incidents are concerning, homeowners aren’t helpless. There are specific, practical steps that can reduce the risk of being watched or targeted. Awareness is the first line of defense. Most people don’t expect to find a hidden device on their own property, so they don’t look. But routine checks of front yards, hedges, planters, and other landscaping—especially areas close to entrances and windows—can help uncover suspicious objects. Devices used in these schemes are typically small but sturdy. They often resemble common items like rocks, lawn ornaments, or decorative plants but may feel unusually heavy or contain visible seams, lenses, or charging ports upon close inspection.

Lighting plays a major role as well. Some homeowners have noticed faint indicator lights or glows from concealed cameras during evening hours. Taking a flashlight outside at night and scanning shrubs and planters can reveal reflections from lenses or other unnatural glints that are easy to miss in daylight. It’s also worth paying attention to battery packs, wires, or anything that looks recently placed or out of place. Unusual objects that weren’t there a few days ago should be treated with suspicion. In some cases, homeowners only discovered cameras after kicking or picking up an object and realizing it was heavier than expected.

Installing your own surveillance system with motion detection and alerts can serve both as a deterrent and a detection tool. Aim security cameras not just at entry points but also outward toward the street and landscaping. If someone is planting a hidden device, they are doing so on foot, and in most cases, they need to spend several seconds in one area. That’s often enough to trigger a well-placed motion sensor or notify a homeowner through a mobile app. Likewise, a basic perimeter alarm or trail camera in the yard can alert you to unusual movement, particularly in areas not visible from inside the house.

Law Enforcement Response and the Limitations of Current Prevention Measures

Local law enforcement is aware of the trend, but their response has been reactive rather than preventive. In many of these cases, including the one in West Covina, police are investigating after homeowners report finding devices—but often, by the time a camera is discovered, it’s unclear who placed it, when it was installed, or how long it had been active. The devices are typically untraceable: small, battery-powered, and without identifying features. They don’t connect to Wi-Fi or cellular networks that can be tracked, and they store footage locally, which means there’s no digital trail to follow. Once the camera is removed, unless fingerprints or direct evidence are found on the device, it’s difficult for police to make arrests or even establish intent.

This lack of concrete leads limits what officers can do. In the West Covina case, police acknowledged that a similar camera had been found nearby just weeks earlier. Whether the two incidents are related remains under investigation. But without suspects or surveillance of the actual installation process, enforcement options are limited. Officers may increase patrols or offer advice to residents, but there’s no infrastructure in place to detect or deter this kind of covert surveillance before it happens. It falls into a grey zone: not a break-in, not vandalism, but still a serious invasion of privacy with clear criminal intent.

Even when authorities link these devices to larger burglary networks—like the international “burglary tourism” rings—the challenge becomes jurisdictional. These groups operate across city and county lines and often rotate personnel in and out of the country, making prosecution difficult. Arrests typically happen after a break-in, not before. This creates a frustrating gap: the tools of a future crime are found, but no immediate legal action can be taken because the crime hasn’t occurred yet.

For now, the burden of vigilance rests mostly on homeowners. While law enforcement plays a role in responding to discoveries, proactive prevention still relies heavily on individuals noticing irregularities, reporting them, and spreading awareness. Until legal frameworks or surveillance laws catch up with this new tactic, early detection and neighbor-to-neighbor communication remain some of the only reliable defenses against this kind of threat.